pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Charlottetown, Virginia  (Read 6387 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Brasilnut

  • Author of the Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock
« on: August 13, 2017, 11:29 »
+2
Anybody close to the action and capturing some editorials?


« Reply #1 on: August 13, 2017, 12:24 »
+6
I personally don't like to aim at making money from the misfortune of others, but each to their own I suppose.

Bad Company

« Reply #2 on: August 13, 2017, 12:31 »
+5
seems like racist will always be a major issue in the U.S. 

A couple of years ago I took our technology team to a sports bar for dinner in Boise, ID and we waited for for service and it never came to us. One guy told me it was due to him being Chinese descendant. This guy served the U.S. in Vietnam as an infantryman for the US Army and now we couldn't even get a sandwich due to the rednecks in ID! I went to the bar and ordered sandwiches and served them to my team as all the rednecks watched us eat and drink  >:(



« Last Edit: August 13, 2017, 12:44 by Bad Company »

« Reply #3 on: August 13, 2017, 13:07 »
+9
I personally don't like to aim at making money from the misfortune of others, but each to their own I suppose.

Well at least there are news photographers covering the story because by your definition this would never be in the news as no one should photo/film or report on it...

« Reply #4 on: August 13, 2017, 13:35 »
+8
I personally don't like to aim at making money from the misfortune of others, but each to their own I suppose.

Well at least there are news photographers covering the story because by your definition this would never be in the news as no one should photo/film or report on it...


First of all, it is Charlottesville. Also, there is a big difference between shooting for news, and shooting to put $$$ in your own pocket at someone else's expense. Surely you have ethics, unlike the US president, who is a turd.

« Last Edit: August 13, 2017, 18:13 by cathyslife »

« Reply #5 on: August 13, 2017, 16:01 »
0
I personally don't like to aim at making money from the misfortune of others, but each to their own I suppose.

Well at least there are news photographers covering the story because by your definition this would never be in the news as no one should photo/film or report on it...

I'm sure you think it's OK to snap a photo of some guy who lost is leg in an accident so you can make a few $$$?

Doing it with the purpose of showing the world what has happened is one thing, but going there to take pictures for Alamy to make a few $$$ is entirely different. I'm sure you see that.

The intent is not to expose the event to the world, it is to make money.

Brasilnut

  • Author of the Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock
« Reply #6 on: August 13, 2017, 16:02 »
+5
Same idiots on this side of the pond.

I have no problem photographing this type of news. I don't understand why this would be a "lack of ethics" or "profiting from misfortune". Perhaps I'm missing the point but to me it's about capturing a current event and of course making a profit from licensing such images.

« Reply #7 on: August 13, 2017, 16:05 »
+3
Yes, of course it depends on WHAT you photograph at the event, you are right. I didn't specify enough, but I meant more specifically the victims, injured people etc.

« Reply #8 on: August 13, 2017, 16:26 »
+1
I personally don't like to aim at making money from the misfortune of others, but each to their own I suppose.

Well at least there are news photographers covering the story because by your definition this would never be in the news as no one should photo/film or report on it...

I'm sure you think it's OK to snap a photo of some guy who lost is leg in an accident so you can make a few $$$?

Doing it with the purpose of showing the world what has happened is one thing, but going there to take pictures for Alamy to make a few $$$ is entirely different. I'm sure you see that.

The intent is not to expose the event to the world, it is to make money.

what an idiocy you have written really.

« Reply #9 on: August 13, 2017, 16:48 »
+5
I personally don't like to aim at making money from the misfortune of others, but each to their own I suppose.

Well at least there are news photographers covering the story because by your definition this would never be in the news as no one should photo/film or report on it...

I'm sure you think it's OK to snap a photo of some guy who lost is leg in an accident so you can make a few $$$?

Doing it with the purpose of showing the world what has happened is one thing, but going there to take pictures for Alamy to make a few $$$ is entirely different. I'm sure you see that.

The intent is not to expose the event to the world, it is to make money.

Reuters? Associated Press? Any different to Alamy Live News or any other news feed?

News photographers and journalists and free lancers get paid for providing coverage.

So lets not get uppity about covering events good, bad or ugly!

Do you think staffers and film crews or free lancers cover these things and then say "Oh my bad I shouldn't get paid for covering this"

Next time you turn on the TV and watch the news of a riot or protest just look how many photographers/videographers are there providing images so you can munch your corn flakes whilst pouring over the news feeds the next day



« Reply #10 on: August 13, 2017, 16:50 »
+1
Yes, of course it depends on WHAT you photograph at the event, you are right. I didn't specify enough, but I meant more specifically the victims, injured people etc.

BS

Look back on photos and film taken showing injured and dead people for news syndication.

You don't shoot news by ignoring the gory details

Go look up Kevin Carter and the Bang-Bang Club
« Last Edit: August 13, 2017, 16:52 by Sammy the Cat »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #11 on: August 13, 2017, 16:50 »
0
I personally don't like to aim at making money from the misfortune of others, but each to their own I suppose.
Nothing to stop anyone who felt the same way making money and donating it to a related cause.

Brasilnut

  • Author of the Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock
« Reply #12 on: August 13, 2017, 16:52 »
+1
Quote
Look back on photos and film taken showing injured and dead people for news syndication.

You don't shoot news by ignoring the gory details

Anybody seen the movie "Nightcrawler"?

fritz

  • I love Tom and Jerry music

« Reply #13 on: August 13, 2017, 18:37 »
+7

Bad Company

« Reply #14 on: August 13, 2017, 19:40 »
0
Quote
Look back on photos and film taken showing injured and dead people for news syndication.

You don't shoot news by ignoring the gory details

Anybody seen the movie "Nightcrawler"?

Yes, love that car he had!

fritz

  • I love Tom and Jerry music

« Reply #15 on: August 13, 2017, 20:09 »
+2
Quote
Look back on photos and film taken showing injured and dead people for news syndication.

You don't shoot news by ignoring the gory details

Anybody seen the movie "Nightcrawler"?

Yes, love that car he had!
...and he loved that car too much!
Andrew Anglin, founder of the neo-Nazi website Daily Stormer, posted a photo of the smashed car that had rammed into a crowd in Charlottesville and said this about it: "The real tragedy is what happened to the car. It was a very nice car, worth much more than the life of whoever died."
« Last Edit: August 13, 2017, 20:13 by fritz »

« Reply #16 on: August 14, 2017, 02:08 »
+2
A few other ethical considerations....

How much does your presence as a photographer distort the behaviour of the people you are taking pictures of?

At what point should you stop taking pictures and instead help the people who are suffering?

A story that is always worth reading.

The photographer, Kevin Carter, took a picture in Africa of vulture waiting for a starving child to die. He won a Pulitzer prize for it. He also committed suicide.

http://100photos.time.com/photos/kevin-carter-starving-child-vulture


« Reply #17 on: August 14, 2017, 02:27 »
+9
I personally don't like to aim at making money from the misfortune of others, but each to their own I suppose.
Nothing to stop anyone who felt the same way making money and donating it to a related cause.

I don't think anyone likes to make money off the misfortune of others (at least when it is worded that way) - but to say a reporter is unethical because he was paid for a story covering an unfortunate topic is a bit backwards i think.  The reporter needs to make money too (pay bills, travel to the location, pay for cameras, pay for food and a roof over his head).  It is important for both positive and negative stories to be covered.  I think the reporter should be paid to cover both.

Doctors make money off the misfortune of others as well.  But looking at it that way is quite backwards IMO.  A doctors makes money by helping those who have suffered a misfortune.  Same as a reporter helps share the story of those who have suffered a misfortune.

« Reply #18 on: August 14, 2017, 03:31 »
+1
A few other ethical considerations....

How much does your presence as a photographer distort the behaviour of the people you are taking pictures of?

At what point should you stop taking pictures and instead help the people who are suffering?

A story that is always worth reading.

The photographer, Kevin Carter, took a picture in Africa of vulture waiting for a starving child to die. He won a Pulitzer prize for it. He also committed suicide.

http://100photos.time.com/photos/kevin-carter-starving-child-vulture



That story is rubbish

Kevin got a UN flight out to location in Southern Sudan

When the plain landed he and other passengers and crew got of the plane while local villagers were helping unload food supplies.

The parents of the little girl had put her on the ground while they helped move the cargo. 

Kevin shot the photo and when the unloading was done the child was scooped up by her parents.

Everyone likes to blame him etc but it was wholly uncalled for.  The child was never in danger and Kevin would no doubt have ended up being accused of kidnap or some souch nonsense if he had picked her up.

As a result of his photo it opened the world's eyes to what was going on.

Carter did not touch the child since photojournalists were "told not to touch famine victims for fear of spreading disease"

His suicide had nothing to do with that photo it had a lot more to do with the cumulative effect of all the subjects he photographed and the death of his friend.

His suicide note:

Im really, really sorry. The pain of life overrides the joy to the point that joy does not exist...I am depressed...without phone...money for rent...money for child support...money for debts...money!!!...I am haunted by the vivid memories of killings and corpses and anger and pain...of starving or wounded children, of trigger-happy madmen, often police, of killer executioners...I have gone to join Ken [recently deceased colleague Ken Oosterbroek] if I am that lucky.
 Kevin Carter in his suicide note,
« Last Edit: August 14, 2017, 03:37 by Sammy the Cat »

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #19 on: August 14, 2017, 04:19 »
+3
In the case of the starving African child (who according to Sammy the Cat, wasn't actually starving) the photographer could have done little to aid her.

In the Charlottesville situation, there were medical professionals aiding the victims. A reporter would only be in the way if he'd try to give medical aid. He could however help by taking pictures to cover the story (as long as he keeps his distance).

Brasilnut

  • Author of the Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock
« Reply #20 on: August 14, 2017, 06:48 »
0
If I take (fake) images of drugs and sell them as stock, does that mean that i'm "profiting from the misery of others?"

I just published a blog post on this subject, highlighting the opioid crisis in the US:

https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2017/08/14/stock-trends-opioid-crisis-in-the-usa/

« Reply #21 on: August 14, 2017, 07:26 »
+1
If I take (fake) images of drugs and sell them as stock, does that mean that i'm "profiting from the misery of others?"

I just published a blog post on this subject, highlighting the opioid crisis in the US:

https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2017/08/14/stock-trends-opioid-crisis-in-the-usa/
You should stick to marijuana though think there might be an unfilled niche there

Brasilnut

  • Author of the Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock
« Reply #22 on: August 14, 2017, 07:43 »
0
Quote
You should stick to marijuana though think there might be an unfilled niche there

I tried but I think could have done a better job. What do you think?

« Reply #23 on: August 14, 2017, 07:47 »
0


That story is rubbish

Kevin got a UN flight out to location in Southern Sudan

When the plain landed he and other passengers and crew got of the plane while local villagers were helping unload food supplies.

The parents of the little girl had put her on the ground while they helped move the cargo. 

Kevin shot the photo and when the unloading was done the child was scooped up by her parents.

Everyone likes to blame him etc but it was wholly uncalled for.  The child was never in danger and Kevin would no doubt have ended up being accused of kidnap or some souch nonsense if he had picked her up.

As a result of his photo it opened the world's eyes to what was going on.

Carter did not touch the child since photojournalists were "told not to touch famine victims for fear of spreading disease"

His suicide had nothing to do with that photo it had a lot more to do with the cumulative effect of all the subjects he photographed and the death of his friend.

His suicide note:

Im really, really sorry. The pain of life overrides the joy to the point that joy does not exist...I am depressed...without phone...money for rent...money for child support...money for debts...money!!!...I am haunted by the vivid memories of killings and corpses and anger and pain...of starving or wounded children, of trigger-happy madmen, often police, of killer executioners...I have gone to join Ken [recently deceased colleague Ken Oosterbroek] if I am that lucky.
 Kevin Carter in his suicide note,


Did you read the article on the Time website I linked to?


« Reply #24 on: August 14, 2017, 09:45 »
0
In the case of the starving African child (who according to Sammy the Cat, wasn't actually starving) the photographer could have done little to aid her.

In the Charlottesville situation, there were medical professionals aiding the victims. A reporter would only be in the way if he'd try to give medical aid. He could however help by taking pictures to cover the story (as long as he keeps his distance).

Where did I say that the child was not starving?

Try and keep up


 

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors